Western "democracy" is hardly actually democratic, it's de facto controlled by moneyed and propertied elites. If you think people actually choose their governments under this system you just bought their line.

> but the accusations of hatred you spew is surely fueled by hate.

"You're hateful for pointing out my hatred!" is shit straight out of the evangelical playbook, you sound like literally any old hatemonger

Your sophistry is fooling nobody and it's highly doubtful you even believe the shit you're spewing yourself, this is bad spin.

weak b8 m8

OK terf

Y'all just don't have the courage to own your own term now that it's a dirty word because you all look like bigots without a new term to scurry under.

TERFs aren't really feminists. When do they ever actually talk about feminism or issues effecting women? It's just a lazy cover over the same old gaggle of mostly christian conservatives.

You clearly have not heard of the Russian EMPIRE. Who do you think it was that colonised Russia as far as North Korea and invaded Manchuria?

Seriously, you don't understand what you're talking about if you think the Czar solely ruled what is now modern-day Russia.

A lot of massacres, starvation, and routine repression of the people under his rule. It is difficult to point out a specific one; While for comparison the Holodomor is often pointed out with the USSR, similar famines (and many smaller ones) happened on a regular basis under the Czar, to the point they were simply part of the normal patchwork of society rather than significant events - Despite certain famous famines in the USSR's history, it's average level of food security was significantly greater than under the Russian Empire. The Russian famine of 1891-1892 in particular was a major driver in the popularity of Marxism in Russia. The spark that lit the fire of the February revolution was a protest-turned-riot against food rationing. This was also against the background of Russia's involvement in WW1 being deeply unpopular and killing a lot of people.

He was an out of touch distant autocrat and one could debate his personal role in all this, but his government very much cared what people did; for the people dying it didn't particularly matter whether it was personally the Czar's fault or his government's fault, as the government's strongly autocratic nature directly stemmed from him regardless of his intentions. Personally as a Jewish person I think he about got what deserved - I don't have much sympathy for a man who happily condoned pogroms against us. What happened to the rest of his family should not have happened.

This was a state that still had serfdom and enforced it very violently. Secret police and mass imprisonment of political opponents was the norm; the later GULAG program effectively built off the precedent of imprisoning people for questionable political crimes as a source of forced labour.

To put it simply, people did not revolt for no reason and establish the conditions that allowed for the Bolsheviks to come to power. They did it because ordinary life was impossible under the Czar's regime.

There are many things one can criticise about the USSR, but "Worse than the Czar" isn't one of them.

They would need to seek asylum in another country.